Revise 1.3 Attempting an IUF World Record and 1.4 Number of Attempts

This discussion has an associated proposal. View Proposal Details here.

Comments about this discussion:

Started 30 Jan 01:32

In the discussion about the documentation criteria, it turned out that it is not really good in terms of the documentation and transparency of world records if world records can also be attempted and set in additional attempts outside of the official competition. I would like to briefly summarize the problems with this approach:

1. the world record list is not transparent and comprehensible: The fact that other results for athletes can be found in official results lists, but not the record performances, makes the records questionable and incomprehensible to outsiders.
2. there is no control of the performances by the participants of the competition: For regular results there is a protest time, so that the official lists can be regarded in a certain way as checked by the community. The other participants may not be aware of additional records outside of the competition and because the results do not appear on official lists, they cannot be checked by other participants.
3. the framework conditions in a competition are different from those outside the competition: psychological factors also play a role in achieving records, which is why the framework conditions of attempts inside the competition and an additional attempt outside the competition differ and may only be comparable to a limited extent.
4. it may not always be possible to grant athletes additional attempts: it could therefore give athletes the impression of unfair treatment if additional attempts are allowed by the organizer on one occasion and not on another.

Overall, I would therefore be in favor of completely eliminating the additional attempts outside of official competitions and only accepting performances from competitions for world records.

Comment 30 Jan 10:37

I agree.

It's clearer and simpler for everyone, except for competitors who want to break a record. That said, it can't be easy to break a world record.

Comment 31 Jan 04:33

It is restrictive if most of our world records can only be set in competition. Not every country has a formal unicycling organisation or competition, which means athletes must have resources to travel in order to be in contention for a world record. The point of the IUF guidelines is to ensure the conditions, witnesses, measurements are of acceptable standard, outside of competition.

I don't understand what you mean by this. Why is the world record list not transparent?
How is protest relevant if it is set out of competition? eg you can't obstruct someone in the Marathon race if you are the only rider. Records out of competition are checked by the WR committee, using the WR guidelines to validate the record. Having a results list that can be 'checked' by 'other participants' doesn't make a record more accurate- it needs to be checked by expert judges to ensure measurements are correct.
Psychological factors are different between in-competition and out-of-competition records, but that is not what is being measured.
Yes, you can have more attempts outside of competition, but why does it invalidate a record if you hit the record mark? Competition is there to test the best performance on the day, not the best performance ever. That why you get medals even if you haven't broken any records.

Comment 31 Jan 09:12

Thank you Ken, for sharing your thoughts. I agree with you.

1.It should not be the task of general public to go through the world record list. The world record committe has the overview and is responsible that the list is up to date. Furthermore I guess it should not be hard to create a cloud or something, where the documentation can be filed. If there should be any doubts about something, the head of the world records committee can give insight to any documents.

2.We have a world record committee and their job is to validate records and to make sure, that they were set under the requested conditions. This is not task of the other participants. If it is open for everyone to try and set a new world record, as Ana Schrödinger mentioned in another discussion about that topic, where should the problem be? Everybody will have the chance to try and break a record and I guess it’s obvious that a marathon racer will not try to break a slow balance record.

3.I don’t agree with Jan. Records which are set outside of competition are often watched by a huge public which doesn’t make the psychological factor easier for a rider. And if the conditions from competition are followed, e.g. 2 attempts for slow balance or IUF Slalom, why should you have an advantage if you know that you only have two attempts and if you don’t break the record you missed your chance?

4.I guess if an athlete announces early enough that he or she wants to attempt a record it should not be a problem. Otherwise I’m sure that there will always be another option. And as Ken mentioned, we are talking about best performances ever.

Comment 31 Jan 11:02

You don't need a formally unicycling organization to organize an event. But for me, setting a record in a competitive sport also means that there is a competitive component to it.
But none of this has anything to do with the question of whether or not we should allow additional attempts inside an event - the framework of the event is there anyway.

To 1: The world record list is not transparent because a performance from an event can be listed as a world record without appearing in any official results list for that event. If I were to see such a list and then not be able to find the performances on the results lists, then this list would appear very suspicious to me and I would call it not transparent and comprehensible.
> 1.It should not be the task of general public to go through the world record list.
But the list is intended for the general public - it is to be expected that people will be interested in the individual performances.

To 2: Exactly, the WRC has to check the performances - and an official results list is very strong proof because it is confirmed by a large number of people. I can't think of any equivalent proof of performance right now. Of course, it can't be the only proof, but it's a very good one and in my oppinion a very important one.

To 3: But we are talking about officiall competition diciplines, for me the competion factor ist a part of this discipline.
> And if the conditions from competition are followed, e.g. 2 attempts for slow balance or IUF Slalom, why should you have an advantage if you know that you only have two attempts and if you don’t break the record you missed your chance?
Because you don't have a ranking in mind, a competition that perhaps only takes place once a year. A separate attempt can simply be tried again the next day, and again the next day, and again...

To 4: > Yes, you can have more attempts outside of competition, but why does it invalidate a record if you hit the record mark?
> And as Ken mentioned, we are talking about best performances ever.
What does this have to do with my argument under 4?

Comment 31 Jan 11:26

I admit that I am not sure I am following the discussion. I thought this was just about discussing the additional attempts and the fact that records for competitive disciplines (such as track records) are only achieved within the framework of a competition.

>Overall, I would therefore be in favor of completely eliminating the additional attempts outside of official competitions and only accepting performances from competitions for world records.

Jan, when you write this, are you proposing that we remove all time trial records that were not achieved in competition?

Comment 31 Jan 13:11

> I admit that I am not sure I am following the discussion. I thought this was just about discussing the additional attempts and the fact that records for competitive disciplines (such as track records) are only achieved within the framework of a competition.

That is exactly what this discussion should be about and that is exactly what the proposal reflects.

> Jan, when you write this, are you proposing that we remove all time trial records that were not achieved in competition?

No, of course not. Time Trails should still be possible outside of official events because of the way they are generally raced alone. "All records attempts except time trials must be done during a publicly accessible competition event. Time trials may be done during a competition event.", that's what the proposal says.

Comment 02 Feb 04:09

I think it's good to have clarified it again. Below is the message I was writing before I wondered if we were all talking about the same subject.

What Jan means is that some of today's world records don't appear in any competition results, because they were set during an extra attempt on the sidelines of a competition. In fact, it even causes confusion among the IUF WR validation committee.
There has been a change of direction (yet to be validated) regarding the collection of testimonials in connection with the WR form. If “out-of-competition” attempts are authorized, either competition officials must be mobilized, or additional evidence must be collected (as might be required for time trial records not in competition).
I think that depending on the discipline, the advantage or disadvantage is not always obvious. But some competitors might consider that WR validated during additional attempts are not fair, if these attempts are no longer allowed under the new WRG. I think that for some WR where the advantage of having been made “out of competition” is not obvious, they should be kept as current IUF WR until they are broken.
It's almost a philosophical question whether WR in competitive disciplines can be beaten outside competition or not. For example, World Athletics only certifies records achieved in competition, and World Aquatics authorizes records achieved outside competition, but in practice these records are non-existent. Where I see a limit is in relation to IUF time trial records. In the long term, I would not agree that these records should no longer be approved by the IUF.

>It is restrictive if most of our world records can only be set in competition. Not every country has a formal unicycling organisation or competition, which means athletes must have resources to travel in order to be in contention for a world record. The point of the IUF guidelines is to ensure the conditions, witnesses, measurements are of acceptable standard, outside of competition.

What is the point of allowing the possibility of making WR outside of a competition? Today no one does it (except for time trial records). I think it's easier to buy a plane ticket than to get the right people together to have some semblance of a competition.

That said, I now wonder if before discussing additional attempts, we should not agree on a list of records that must be achieved within the framework of a competition...

Comment 02 Feb 07:12

> Where I see a limit is in relation to IUF time trial records. In the long term, I would not agree that these records should no longer be approved by the IUF.

I completely agree with you here, time trails are not classic competition disciplines where the competition between the participants can be seen as part of the discipline - this is explicitly about a race alone against the clock. Therefore, these records should still be able to take place in specially scheduled attempts. However, the other disciplines in which we hold world records are competitive disciplines in which, in my opinion, the competition is a part of the discipline - what I wanted to express with my third point.

Comment 04 Feb 04:55

What Jan means is that some of today's world records don't appear in any competition results, because they were set during an extra attempt on the sidelines of a competition. In fact, it even causes confusion among the IUF WR validation committee.

-> Where is there confusion?

Do I understand correctly that just the four of us (Jan, Simon, Ken and me) are discussing about that topic? What about the others? Just because two people are in favour of not allowing additiona attempts anymore, the rule is changed and it will have consequences for a lot of riders? We are not a professional sport as athletics and we will never be. We just need to be careful with what we decide here. We are around 5-6 people who decide about very elemental things for our sport. It’s not part of that discussion, but are you aware, that if all the new rules pass, we will have to do an almost COMPLETE new world record list because all the records which are valid at the moment will not be valid anymore under the new guidelines? Just thinking about all track race records except 400m and 800m will not be valid anymore. And what happens if we go over the guidelines again in a couple of years? Will we then have historical of historical records? We all know that most result lists are not available online forever. Do we then recognize performances as world records which aren’t just because old lists are not available anymore?

Comment 04 Feb 06:22

I do not agree with restricting who and when records can be attempted. If we are not careful you can only set a world record at UNICON or at the German nationals.

That is not that I do not think that a higher standard of record keeping or evidence should not be required for outside of these competitions as they have the structures built in to them. All records need to be proved beyond doubt.

Historic records are really important and need to be kept. Even Guinness does that and I think we should consider how to document and keep historic records. I was involved with the breaking of a 132 year old penny farthing one hour record. The original record was recorded in detail and kept for prosperity. We know the track used, how it was checked for distance, the cycle that was used; both size, weight and crank lengths, we know the riders height, weight and background, we even know the officials. They recorded the times for each lap. This data changed the record in to a something real for us, it showed they did everything they could to prove the record really happened; even though it was not done with lasers or GPS, we know this happened and it was amazing! It also helped us analyse his riding knowing his cadence, power and tactics within the record.

Comment 04 Feb 06:24

> the rule is changed and it will have consequences for a lot of riders?

For riders who want to set records outside of official competitions - to be honest, this shouldn't really affect that many.

> We are not a professional sport as athletics and we will never be.

But that doesn't have to stop us from having sensible, comprehensible and transparent rules and decision-making processes?

> We just need to be careful with what we decide here. We are around 5-6 people who decide about very elemental things for our sport.

First of all, I would like to remind you that the Rulebook Committee decides the elementary things for our sport, because the Rulebook is the elementary basis of our sport. We decide in this committee how world records are to be set and documented in accordance with this rulebook.

> It’s not part of that discussion, but are you aware, that if all the new rules pass, we will have to do an almost COMPLETE new world record list because all the records which are valid at the moment will not be valid anymore under the new guidelines?

Of course I'm aware of that - however, this is primarily not because the WRG are changing, but because the Rulebook is also changing. And if the rules of the disciplines change so much that the WRC is of the opinion that the old records cannot be broken under the new conditions, then it is of course reasonable to move the old records to an historical record section. As I have already written, every rule change requires a careful subsequent evaluation of which records may no longer be comparable with future records as a result of this change. And this applies not only to changes to the WRG, but especially changes to the rulebook.

Comment 04 Feb 06:43

I would like to add something specifically for IUF slalom.
Until a certain time, no finals were organized for this discipline. The records for IUF slalom at that time were therefore of a much lower level than those of other track disciplines.
From a certain point (I think Unicon 12) they started to organize finals.
The fact that the best riders could compete against each other in an organized final, not randomly after endless queuing between a long line of kids, made the level rise enormously and in these finals records could be set.
In recent years, IUF slalom finals are very rarely organized, making it almost impossible to set a record without extra attempts.
This is an argument for me, at least for this discipline, to continue to allow record attempts outside of competition.

Comment 04 Feb 09:08

> In recent years, IUF slalom finals are very rarely organized

To be honest, I don't have that impression. The large championships still all offer a slalom final, and it is mandatory for Unicons for many years now.
Yes, of course there are also small competitions/"Cups" that don't offer a slalom final - but they haven't done so in the past either. I am not aware of any competition that has offered a final in the past and no longer does so in recent times... Is this really the case?
If this is the case and if a final is so important for the competition and the performance of the athletes from a sporting point of view, then the aim should be to offer a final at more competitions. If necessary, the rules should be adapted and the importance of the final should be emphasized.

Comment 04 Feb 09:46

For riders who want to set records outside of official competitions - to be honest, this shouldn't really affect that many.

No, it doesn't affect that many, but still some and do we want to exclude them? If somebody wants to set a record but doesn't have the possibilities in his/her own country as there aren't the standards as we ask for, should that person not have the possibility to break a record?

But that doesn't have to stop us from having sensible, comprehensible and transparent rules and decision-making processes?

No, I'm also in favor of having comprehensible and transparent rules. But as long as records are documented properly (e.g. with video evidence and all the documentation we ask for) I don't see any problems because it is clear for everybody what is asked for.

As far as I'm concerned the rulebook doesn't decide about additional attempts.

Marginal note about the IUF Slalom: As far as I know there haven't been any finals at Unicon in Grenoble. So if there aren't any finals even at Unicon, I can understand Erics argumentation. Furthermore I have heard that at Unicon in Bemidji the Slalom was set out on a tar surface which would then (with your argumentation from the other discussion about track races) also not count. So we have two Unicons in a row where there wasn't everything as it should have been.

Comment 04 Feb 10:12

> If somebody wants to set a record but doesn't have the possibilities in his/her own country as there aren't the standards as we ask for, should that person not have the possibility to break a record?

Yes, if the necessary standards are not met, then no record can be set in an official IUF competition discipline. But if the standards can't be met, it doesn't matter whether it's a competition or not. If the standards are not met, a record could not be set in a competition either.

> As far as I know there haven't been any finals at Unicon in Grenoble.

The IUF Slalom final had to be canceled at extremely short notice due to the weather conditions - yes, unfortunately this can happen with a sport that takes place outdoors and of course it is unfortunate when there is no alternative time available and a final has to be canceled completely as a result. But this is neither the rule nor planned in any way.

> Furthermore I have heard that at Unicon in Bemidji the Slalom was set out on a tar surface which would then also not count.

Yes, no world records could be set in the track disciplines in Bemidji. This was clear to the organizers from the start and was communicated to the participants. Part of the problem is that the participants simply accept it when the IUF rules are not followed. I always find it strange that the smallest competition with a handful of participants is sometimes better at adhering to the IUF rules than a Unicon.

Comment 04 Feb 12:50

Having several examples of where track records couldn't have been set at Unicon (Bemidji 2024, Korea 2018), what are the arguments against having additional attempts? If even Unicons can't guarantee conditions under which records can be acknowleged, I really have my doubts if we are on the right track here.

Comment 05 Feb 02:04

If an event does not meet the requirements for records, additional attempts do not change the fact that no records can be set at this event and that is what is at stake here: Do we really want to continue to allow additional attempts within an event but outside the official competition? Or do the disadvantages outweigh the advantages?

I have already mentioned the arguments against this several times in various ways and the only real counter-argument is that in disciplines with an open starting order, in which no final is held, it may be much more difficult for the athletes to perform at their best in the competition - simply because the conditions (long queues and waiting for the start, no warm-up possible immediately beforehand, etc.) are inadequate for a sporting competition. However, this only applies to an extremely small number of disciplines and only under certain circumstances. And here I ask myself whether the conditions within the official competition could not simply be improved so that the athletes have the opportunity to perform at their best. In my opinion, this would be a much better approach than allowing additional attempts outside of the official competition.

Comment 05 Feb 15:52

Agree with Simon on most point, but just to clarify this one:

"What is the point of allowing the possibility of making WR outside of a competition? Today no one does it (except for time trial records). I think it's easier to buy a plane ticket than to get the right people together to have some semblance of a competition."

I was thinking of something like the marathon or 10km record. It's possible to get a course measured (or use an existing course measured for runners), then try to set a paced record, outside of competition.

Comment 06 Feb 01:49

> I was thinking of something like the marathon or 10km record. It's possible to get a course measured (or use an existing course measured for runners), then try to set a paced record, outside of competition.

But if you have a measured course available, then it will usually be on public roads and these will probably not simply be closed to a single person. Personally, I wouldn't want to encourage anyone to set a record in normal road traffic - I can't imagine that you can really safely attempt to break a world record in one of the road racing disciplines while observing all the traffic rules in normal road traffic. From my point of view, we as the WRC should also use our rules to prevent such attempts from being made.

Comment 08 Feb 05:23

In my opinion, there are already a lot of time trial records. In addition, because of drafting, road race records will be more and more difficult to beat alone on a road.

> Where is there confusion?

I don't think that the argument of confusion in the committee is the best argument, it was to illustrate that even the most involved people can find it hard to get their bearings (e-mail exchange of December 17).
I think it's great that the records set in competition are listed in the competition results, and I'd prefer it if finals were organized, rather than additional attempts. That's my point of view, but if the majority thinks it should be different, I'll be okay with that.

There are already records that are allowed outside of competitions: time trial. Maybe a solution could be to define the records that should be exclusively organized within a competition. Which does not mean that all track records should be. I have the feeling that the disciplines for which finals in competitions are organized, the records could only concern performances within a competition (i.e. without additional attempts). I am pretty sure that for track racing and for jump, there would be no problems.
On the other hand, stillstand should perhaps be considered as an out-of-competition record... it's just an example, I don't know how complicated it is to judge. And maybe some more should be included.

Comment 09 Feb 04:24

> That's my point of view, but if the majority thinks it should be different, I'll be okay with that.

I completely agree with you.

I have already written above about why I see it as very critical to allow record attempts outside of competitions in road races (not Time Trials).

I would like to come back to my 3rd point, as this was also the main reason why we excluded an unlimited number of attempts for records. The psychological factors are different between in-competition and out-of-competition records - and I think this applies especially to the track disciplines and the jumps.
When I think about casting, for example, I have to take significantly more risk to achieve a high distance because I have to go to my personal limit and that is associated with significantly more risk in coasting because the smallest mistakes have a much greater impact. During a competition, I will of course always consider how much risk I want to take, as it's also about placings. If I have additional attempts outside of the competition, then it's not about anything except maybe breaking a record. But I know that I can/must take every risk to break the record. So if record attempts are possible outside of the competition, then this will mean that the records within a competition are no longer (or can no longer be) broken. I would find it more than a pity if at some point we had a list of records in competitive disciplines that could no longer be broken in competitions. For me, the competition is simply an essential part of the record. There are so many people who are better in training than in competition, precisely because the competition itself is a factor that cannot be neglected. Do we really want to simply exclude this factor from the records in our competitive disciplines? Is it really desirable for records to only be broken outside of official competitions at some point?

It looks to me as if there are a bunch of arguments against record attempts outside of official competitions - but actually only one argument in favor, namely that it will otherwise be more difficult to break records. But what's so bad about it being slightly more difficult to break a record?
I can understand that other framework conditions, such as a photo finish system for track races, make it much more difficult to break a record, because it is of course much easier for organizers to implement a hand timing and perhaps not everywhere events take place where a photo finish system is available. But we all agree that these requirements are reasonable and necessary for comparable records. In the end, limiting the records to official competitions seems to me to be only a marginal additional increase in the difficulty of breaking a record, which is also based on a bunch of reasons.

Comment 12 Feb 09:52

I fully share your point of view.

For competitive disciplines, it's obvious to me that the main objective is to achieve a ranking in the competition. Record and ranking objectives are not always compatible.
For road races, to aim for victory and a record, you need to be way ahead of the other competitors. As soon as the level is tighter, you have to make a choice between the 2, and for me the obvious choice is the ranking (all the more so if it's a UNICON race). It's possible to choose the record, but that's to the detriment of the race.

For road races the main factor is drafting. But I have no doubt that for track races and jumps there are other comparable factors that force competitors to make choices between ranking and record, as Jan mentioned.

I don't know if this applies to all competitive disciplines. There are certainly competitive disciplines that are more or less affected than others.
For example, given the current WR times for stillstand, I doubt whether the context of a competition makes any difference. But I may be wrong.

Afterwards it may not be necessary to declassify all the records that were made "out of competition". If for some records it is only a question of number of attempts, there is a chance that one day these records will be beaten in competition. And maybe that means that there are not enough attempts planned. For the IUF slalom, is it 2 attempts for the qualifications and 2 for the final?

Comment 13 Feb 01:31

> For the IUF slalom, is it 2 attempts for the qualifications and 2 for the final?

Yes, 2 attempts in the age group runs / qualifications and 2 for the final.
Currently, the two attempts in the final are completely independent attempts and times from the qualification do not count for final placings. It could also be discussed in the rulebook to change this principle and make the final attempts additional attempts, similar to other sports where the best X athletes get additional attempts. This would possibly lead to the athletes being willing to take a little more risk, as they already have a good time from the qualification and therefore the times in the final would be a little faster. But that would be a rulebook issue and not a world record issue.

Comment 17 Feb 09:37

> It could also be discussed in the rulebook to change this principle and make the final attempts additional attempts, similar to other sports where the best X athletes get additional attempts

I think this is a topic that deserves to be addressed in the rulebook. I imagine that this could be applied to disciplines that are not in direct confrontation. Unless there is a reason to doubt the performance achieved in "qualification", I think this is an interesting way to solve the problem of the number of attempts. In athletics, there are generally 3 attempts in qualification, 3 in the final + 3 additional attempts for the best. Which is really a lot more attempts.

_____________________

This subject brought up another even more fundamental one, that of validating performances achieved in competition. I have the impression that we are far from having reached a consensus, and in my opinion this is the committee's most important subject. Standardizing record claims with a form and the documentation required for the record are intimately linked to the fact that the record is made in competition. If it's not a competition, who are the official judges signing the form?

Comment 18 Feb 05:56

Yes, of course, the topic of the number of final attempts and the scoring of these attempts is definitely a Rulebook topic.
What I just wanted to say is that there are other ways to increase the number of attempts. And I am of the opinion that this should be the way to go if someone is of the opinion that the current rules for competitions are not suitable to achieve the best results in the competition.

Of course, the question that started this discussion remains open: Do we really want to allow additional attempts outside the official competition - as is currently the case with the accepted proposal 10: https://world-record-2017.committees.unicycling-software.com/proposals/10
or do we only want to allow records to be set within the official competition, which in my opinion has numerous advantages.

It does indeed seem difficult to reach a consensus here at the moment. As already written above, the only argument in favor of retaining the additional attempts outside the official ranking seems to me to be that it would otherwise be more difficult to break records. As already written, the Rulebook Committee could certainly work against this to some extent by adapting the mode for finals - however, this would be out of our hands, but in my opinion it would be much better than allowing additional attempts for world records.

I would ask all those who are against the proposal linked to this discussion to present their arguments once again and please only refer to the proposed changes. Perhaps a compromise can be found in a timely manner so that we can then finalize the general documentation rules.

Comment 18 Feb 08:08

Argument Against Restricting IUF World Record Attempts to Competitions
I strongly oppose the restriction of IUF World Record attempts to competitions for the following reasons:

Unfair Disadvantage for Riders Outside Major Unicycling Countries
This rule discriminates against unicyclists who do not live in regions with frequent sanctioned competitions or do not have the financial means to travel to UNICON. A world record should be about the best performance, not about access to specific events.

A World Record Should Reflect the Best Performance, Regardless of Setting
A world record represents the highest level of achievement in the sport. If an athlete meets all the required conditions for a valid attempt—regardless of whether it occurs during a competition—their performance should be recognized. Competitions provide a controlled environment, but if identical conditions can be replicated outside of a competition, there is no justifiable reason to exclude those results.

Long-Distance Records Are Already Conducted Under Controlled Conditions
Long-distance records are not attempted on open roads but on closed, controlled tracks that ensure precise measurement. There is no significant difference between an attempt during a competition and one outside of it, as long as the same standards and verification processes are followed. Restricting attempts to competitions unfairly limits athletes in regions with fewer events.

Post-Competition Attempts Are Naturally Self-Limiting
Concerns about athletes making repeated attempts after a competition are largely unfounded. The logistical challenges—such as officials and course infrastructure remaining in place—naturally limit the number of additional attempts. Furthermore, achieving a world record is not a matter of infinite tries; endurance and peak performance are limiting factors, making it unlikely that the best result comes from excessive attempts.

Additional Arguments to Consider
Historical Precedent: Many unicycling world records have been set outside of competition under strict verification conditions. Changing the rules now would invalidate future opportunities for athletes following the same path.

Flexibility for Innovation and Growth: Record attempts outside of competitions allow athletes to push boundaries in controlled environments without being constrained by event schedules. This can lead to new advancements in unicycling performance and technique.

Fairness Across Disciplines: Some unicycling disciplines naturally lend themselves to competition settings, while others (such as long-distance records) are more suited to individual attempts. Restricting records to competitions disproportionately affects certain types of records.

Comment 18 Feb 08:54

> Unfair Disadvantage for Riders Outside Major Unicycling Countries

The argument does not relate to the proposed changes, which is why I will not go into it in detail.

> A World Record Should Reflect the Best Performance, Regardless of Setting

Okay, at this point we have a fundamentally different opinion. I am of the opinion that the setting for a record in a competitive discipline should not be irrelevant, because otherwise it is no longer a record in a competitive discipline and the competition is part of the setting.

> Long-Distance Records Are Already Conducted Under Controlled Conditions

With the exception of Time Trials, all current (and as far as I know practically all previous) road racing records were set within competitions. I see no argument here for attempts outside of official competitions!? - nothing should change for Time Trials. And again it does not really relate to the proposed changes!
BTW: If the attempts take place on closed roads anyway, then it would be much nicer for the unicycle community to simply hold the attempt as an official competition and also give other athletes the opportunity to take part. That would be the perfect way to increase the number of competitions.

> Post-Competition Attempts Are Naturally Self-Limiting

Without further adjustments, only the same number of additional attempts as in the regular competition are allowed anyway. But the planned changes are not primarily about further reducing the number of attempts - as I said, I would have no complaints at all if the Rulebook Committee decided to add more attempts for finalists or change the final mode or whatever.

> Historical Precedent: Many unicycling world records have been set outside of competition under strict verification conditions. Changing the rules now would invalidate future opportunities for athletes following the same path.

The overwhelming majority of records were (fortunately) set within competitions. A very small number of records were set outside of an official competition and for the disciplines concerned - especially the IUF Slalom - significantly better conditions could be created within a competition by changing the final mode.
In other words, additional out-of-competition attempts in these disciplines combat the symptoms - it would be better to tackle the causes and ensure that the best performances can also be achieved by the athletes during the competitions.

> Flexibility for Innovation and Growth: Record attempts outside of competitions allow athletes to push boundaries in controlled environments without being constrained by event schedules. This can lead to new advancements in unicycling performance and technique.

Yes, but as you write in controlled environments without being constrained by event schedules - and this is exactly how we move from a record in a competition discipline to a record that no longer has anything to do with an actual competition.

> Fairness Across Disciplines: Some unicycling disciplines naturally lend themselves to competition settings, while others (such as long-distance records) are more suited to individual attempts. Restricting records to competitions disproportionately affects certain types of records.

But that's precisely why we have the distinction between time trials and road racing records for the long-distance records - one is a record that is set alone and the other in a competition with other riders. If we eliminate the competition from the road racing records here, we would have two time trial records - surely that can't be the point and what you mean by fairness across disciplines?

Comment 18 Feb 09:07

Jan, perhaps the exception shouldn't be time trials, but records in competition, in which case we'd have to propose a restrictive list of disciplines for which records would only take place in competition. As a first step, we could include track and road races where all records have been set in competition.

This list could be extended depending on the progress of the rulebook on the disciplines. This would allow for a more step-by-step change, without completely closing the door to new records achieved outside a competition.

Comment 18 Feb 09:29

> perhaps the exception shouldn't be time trials, but records in competition, in which case we'd have to propose a restrictive list of disciplines for which records would only take place in competition. As a first step, we could include track and road races where all records have been set in competition.

But as already written, I also see a big influence of the competition in the technical track disciplines (e.g. coasting). In my opinion, ignoring this factor leads to completely different records that are no longer directly linked to the actual competition discipline because the competition factor is excluded for the record.
But to give the idea a chance: In your opinion, which disciplines should be allowed to be set up outside of a competition in additional attempts? (Except for the Time Trails, which have different rules anyway)

> This list could be extended depending on the progress of the rulebook on the disciplines. This would allow for a more step-by-step change, without completely closing the door to new records achieved outside a competition.

I don't quite understand what you mean by that. Do you mean in relation to the current disciplines covered by the WRG? Or for a future development with possibly new disciplines that we are not yet thinking about? If completely new disciplines are included in the WRG, new rules would have to be established for them anyway, so that it can always be determined as part of this process which format is suitable for the new discipline.

Comment 19 Feb 10:05

I agree with you that there is a real interest in validating records set in competition. However, given the reactions of the WR committee members (I didn't notice if everyone gave their opinion), I think it's in our interest to try to find a compromise that suits the greatest number (if not all). By wanting all records to be achieved in the framework of a competition, the risk is that your proposal will be rejected and that no record will be involved, which I would consider a pity.

I suggest we agree on a list of records achieved exclusively in competition. These records could be given greater visibility on the official IUF page, as a form of label designed to integrate world records from competitive disciplines where their competition format (in line with the rulebook) has reached a certain level of maturity.

I agree with you that the competition ranking is a factor in all disciplines, but I'm sure it's more important in head-to-head disciplines, when you see your opponents.

I'm thinking in particular of at least the track races that are run in direct confrontation (100m, 400m, 800m, 30m WW, 50m 1 foot, 4x100m relay and the 200m if it enters the rulebook), as well as the road races (10km, marathon and possibly 100km (if one day this event is organized again)).

For jumps, IUF slalom, slow races and coasting, competition certainly has an influence. I have no expertise in these disciplines, and I think the decision that these records should only be made in competition should be discussed among experts. If the rulebook provides for sufficient attempts during competitions, it would seem normal to me that, in time, these disciplines should be included in the list of records achieved during a competition.

So I'm proposing a less radical approach, which I hope might be more consensual. And I'm also aware that the risk is that no-one will be happy with it.

It's a long way from the subject of the number of attempts, but I think it's a subject that needs to be addressed first. To the point where I wonder if we shouldn't close this discussion and start a new one.

Comment 19 Feb 10:58

> By wanting all records to be achieved in the framework of a competition, the risk is that your proposal will be rejected and that no record will be involved, which I would consider a pity.

What do you mean with "that no record will be involved"? If the proposal is rejected, then we will stick with the rules we currently have. That would not be desirable from my point of view, but if the majority are in favor of keeping the rules as they are, then I will of course accept that.

> These records could be given greater visibility on the official IUF page, as a form of label designed to integrate world records from competitive disciplines where their competition format (in line with the rulebook) has reached a certain level of maturity.

That would create a kind of two- class records - I don't think that would be desirable. All records held by the IUF are records in official competition disciplines in accordance with the IUF Rulebook. I don't think it makes sense to subdivide them again and possibly give athletes the feeling that some records are worth more than others.

> but I'm sure it's more important in head-to-head disciplines, when you see your opponents

I think the competition factor is even bigger in some technical disciplines - as I said for coasting, for example, the same would definitely apply to gliding.

Comment 20 Feb 04:01

"But if you have a measured course available, then it will usually be on public roads and these will probably not simply be closed to a single person. Personally, I wouldn't want to encourage anyone to set a record in normal road traffic - I can't imagine that you can really safely attempt to break a world record in one of the road racing disciplines while observing all the traffic rules in normal road traffic. From my point of view, we as the WRC should also use our rules to prevent such attempts from being made." --Jan

There is nothing that says a road race needs to take place on public roads. In fact, most of the ones I have attended during Unicon have been set on cycle paths or race tracks (eg the F1 track in Montreal).

The rider can organise for the course to be measured to world athletic standard, they do not need to rely on a pre-measured course.

"In my opinion, there are already a lot of time trial records. In addition, because of drafting, road race records will be more and more difficult to beat alone on a road."-- Simon

Why can't a solo-out of competition record attempt include drafting? You just need pacing riders to ride in front- there is no rule against this. We may need a rule to exclude motor-pacing or other non-unicycle related drafting.

There is also a question of what constitutes competition. You can organise a record attempt with two people, under competition conditions, to make it official.

I agree with Roger on all points in his post.

Comment 20 Feb 04:11

> There is also a question of what constitutes competition. You can organise a record attempt with two people, under competition conditions, to make it official.

And that's why I would say it's not too difficult to organize an event. As long as the event is publicly announced in advance and other athletes have the opportunity to take part, it would be an official event for me.
I wouldn't consider something to be an official event if it wasn't publicly announced and nobody else could take part in it.

Comment 20 Feb 05:26

I fully agree with Roger's arguments.
In doing so, I also don't like the idea of a duplicate list of records, league and out-of-competition records. That makes no sense.
I do not agree that a record must be set in a competition. A competition finds out who is the best in the pack, a world record is a recording of the best performance ever. These are 2 different things that should not be mutually exclusive.
We should be careful not to make it impossible to break records by introducing conservative rules. On the contrary, we should make every effort to create the opportunities to make record-breaking attempts possible.
In this sense, I am absolutely in favor of record attempts outside of competition, within the framework of the rules of the game, of course.

I think I can claim to have some expertise in IUF slalom as I am close to some good slalom riders. The problem with this discipline is that conditions in the ageroups are always bad. Long queing, performing in between two race disciplines, etc.
I know some riders who had the potential to break the WR at every event. Between 2015 and 2018, the WR was broken on every occasion where the weather conditions were good (either in a final or an extra attempt). From 2019 to now, there were simply no more occasions (except out of competition). In the last 5 years there have been almost no finals organized anywhere. Jan tell me where those finals were if you don't agree. Even at Unicon France the finals were cancelled because of an announced thunderstorm that never came.
I would regret hindering the evolution of the sport by introducing rules that make record breaking almost impossible.

Comment 20 Feb 05:47

"And that's why I would say it's not too difficult to organize an event. As long as the event is publicly announced in advance and other athletes have the opportunity to take part, it would be an official event for me.
I wouldn't consider something to be an official event if it wasn't publicly announced and nobody else could take part in it" --Jan

Then it's semantics. You are saying that being a competition makes it official, but what it really means is that all the conditions (documentation/witnesses/course measurement/timing) are in place. My silly example is no different to a solo record- except with a fill-in/dummy competitor.

Official announcement is not specific to competition events. Most solo time-trial record attempts are broadcasted to the unicycling community in advance.

Comment 20 Feb 06:09

> Then it's semantics. You are saying that being a competition makes it official, but what it really means is that all the conditions (documentation/witnesses/course measurement/timing) are in place. My silly example is no different to a solo record- except with a fill-in/dummy competitor.

Yes, maybe it's mainly semantics - but in my eyes the wording already makes a huge difference. Whether we represent a competitive sport that recognizes records in competitive disciplines or whether we simply want to determine the best performance detached from a competition. For me, this wording makes the difference between a competitive discipline in a competitive sport and no competitive discipline.

> Official announcement is not specific to competition events. Most solo time-trial record attempts are broadcasted to the unicycling community in advance.

The announcement alone is not specific to competitive events - but the fact that other athletes can take part in a competitive event and not in solo records is. And in the interest of a competitive sport, it would be desirable for events to take place where others can take part.

But all in all, the majority is obviously in favor of sticking to the current rules and continuing to allow additional attempts outside of the official competition.
I think this discussion can now be closed and we can return to the initial problem from which this discussion emerged, which documentation we want to demand in these cases and how perhaps a transparent and comprehensible record list can be achieved anyhow.

Comment 22 Feb 13:07

Jan> It seems obvious to you that world records are already linked to competitive disciplines.
To me, this discussion reveals that most members don't want WR to be linked to official competition. What bothers me is that the substantial work you've done on the submission form and documentation criteria is based on the fact that these records were set in competition.

I think it would be a good idea to discuss whether we can agree that certain records should be “reserved” for competition only. I think this is necessary to validate the work you've done.

> Why can't a solo-out of competition record attempt include drafting? You just need pacing riders to ride in front- there is no rule against this. We may need a rule to exclude motor-pacing or other non-unicycle related drafting.

It's not just drafting that makes it a race or not. Some clarification is needed on drafting in races. In fact, the current unlimited marathon WR was set with drafting with non-unicyclists. The effect was not significant, but I think we need to take action against drafting with non-unicyclists.

> I do not agree that a record must be set in a competition. A competition finds out who is the best in the pack, a world record is a recording of the best performance ever. These are 2 different things that should not be mutually exclusive.

I agree that this argument is valid for events where you go one after the other. On the other hand, there are records for athletics and road races, and the principle is to do an event with other competitors at the same time. If you do it on your own, you can't call it a race. It can be called a time trial or a demonstration, but not a race.

Comment 23 Feb 03:07

> What bothers me is that the substantial work you've done on the submission form and documentation criteria is based on the fact that these records were set in competition.

No, this work is based on the fact that the world records should have a closer connection to the rulebook, which we were also quite in agreement on in another discussions.
We do need to find some additional documentation criteria for the additional attempts - that was just the point in the other discussion where the question arose as to how reasonable additional attempts actually are - but essentially we already have a good basis for this and we don't need to duplicate or redo any work.

Comment 23 Feb 06:53

Distinguishing Record-Setting in Competition vs. Outside Competition

1. Competition-Based Records

Official Verification:
In a competition, record claims are verified by officials. They are responsible for submitting the world record notification, ensuring that the attempt complies with both the specific competition rules and the broader discipline regulations. This built‐in oversight provides a high degree of confidence in the validity of the record.

Existing Form Suitability:
The current submission form is well adapted to record attempts made during competitions, as it assumes that officials have already verified all conditions under which the attempt was made.

2. Non-Competition Record Attempts

Competitor Responsibility:
When an attempt is made outside of a formal competition, the responsibility shifts to the competitor. The competitor must provide comprehensive evidence that:

The attempt was performed in strict adherence to all the rules of the competitive discipline.
There was no advantage gained by not being in a competition setting (e.g., differences in equipment, timing methods, or external conditions).
Enhanced Documentation Requirements:
A tailored section could be added to the existing form specifically for non-competition attempts. This section would require the submission of:

Detailed proof that all competitive rules were followed.
Evidence that the conditions of the attempt were equivalent to those in an official competition, ensuring a level playing field.

3. Grey Areas and Further Discussion

Extra Attempts Post-Competition:
Handling extra attempts made after an official competition has ended adds the question, who would be responsible for submission, is it the official of an event that has finished or the competitor?

Conclusion:

I think we do need to distinguish between competition and non-competition record attempts, we can maintain the integrity and fairness of world records. Competition-based records benefit from built-in official oversight, while non-competition records require a higher burden of proof from the competitor. Adapting the existing form with an additional section for non-competition attempts ensures that all record claims are held to rigorous standards, while still recognizing extraordinary achievements made outside formal events.

Comment 23 Feb 07:32

Roger, everything you write here does not concern the proposed and discussed change, but rather the documentation of records - there are separate discussions for that. I would therefore ask you to address these aspects in the relevant discussions and make specific suggestions as to how you think the already proposed rules should be adapted.